Where you stand on the Resurrection tends to mirror how you interpret the Bible, said Stephen T. Davis, a professor of philosophy at California's Claremont McKenna College. Davis believes in the bodily resurrection, though he acknowledges some seemingly contradictory New Testament accounts.

"Some are easy and some I don't know how to reconcile," said Davis, a minister in the Presbyterian Church (USA). "They were different stories that got talked about and talked about, so its not surprising there would have been some discrepancies. But there's tremendous agreement on the basic facts."

Any discrepancies can be "eliminated by a straight-up reading of the text," said James Emery White, president of the Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary, a evangelical school in South Hamilton, Mass. "There's no sense that any of the earliest followers had the remotest sense that this was metaphorical."

"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works-a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was (the) Christ; (64) and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

11
posted on 04/09/2007 4:14:26 PM PDT
by Spunky
("Everyone has a freedom of choice, but not of consequences.")

It’s become as much an Easter tradition as the Easter Bunny. Every year they come up with a new twist. We found Jesus’ casket. We found a new scroll that says Jesus had 15 kids. We found Mary’s diaphram.

The debate for this millenia is over global warming and (A) whether Man is the CAUSE of global warming and (B) whether Man can do anything to alter future climate.

It may be made irrelevant by the OTHER debate for this millenia and that is whether muslims will see the error of their ways and cease centuries of global conquest in the name of Islam. Why not prove that Mohammed was not risen into the Heavens on a horse? Kill. that sacred cow.

17
posted on 04/09/2007 4:21:27 PM PDT
by weegee
(I'm waiting to exhale. The Supreme Court has ruled that CO2 is pollution.)

It’s either true or it’s not. If it is true, which I personally have no doubts about, it is glorious. If it isn’t true, shame on us.

But debate, one way or another won’t change reality. Scholars pouring over texts with preconceived notions won’t change reality. Desire won’t change reality.

Reality is: a tomb was empty where no one expected it to be (and no ancient source records dispute on this fact.)

Reality is: a group of disheartened, frightened men went from cowering in a room in Jerusalem to stalwart proclaimers of a faith that lit a fire that went around the world. Moreover, they were willing and did give their lives for this.

Reality is: Something happened.

Either:
For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty. For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. 2 Peter 1:15-18

In 33 AD, the last thing the Romans as well as the Sanhedrin wanted was for Jesus’ body to disappear, because they knew it would rock their world if it did by further empowering the Christians. That’s why the Romans placed guards at Joseph of Arimathea’s tomb, who had asked for and received permission for Jesus to be entombed there.

So it’s a given that when His body turned up missing, there would’ve been an all-out search for it, leaving no stone unturned until it was found, but of course it never was.

Another question has to do with the stone that closed the tomb: There were Roman guards there all night, and any human trying to open the tomb would’ve made enough noise to alert them, so how was that thing moved?

30
posted on 04/09/2007 4:48:31 PM PDT
by Marauder
(The height of hypocrisy: Congress upset because someone lied to them.)

John Dominic Crossan, a Roman Catholic and a former professor at DePaul University, said the Resurrection is best understood as a metaphor, a belief that puts him at odds with his own church.

Saying the Resurrection "is a metaphor doesn't dismiss it," Crossan said. "I get the message, I get the challenge from the metaphor."

I must disagree with the good professor here. Saying the Resurrection is a metaphor does dismiss it. For if it is just a metaphorif Jesus never arose from the deadthen He is dead and we are all as good as dead ourselves. Hence, Crossan's "message" is that the Gospels lie and that nothing is real but the reality of the grave.

Fortunately for all of us, the Resurrection is not merely a metaphor, but an event that truly happened.

This non-article was designed to attack Christianity — again. There is no controversy or doubts within Christianity about the resurrection. There are doubts by non-believers but not believing Christians. If someone does not believe the resurrection then they are not a Christian. In fact without believing in the resurrection there is no reason to be a Christian.

I thought we had that one worked out already, after 2000 years. I wonder how these people did on their SATs. “Why seek ye the living among the dead? He is not here, but he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay.”. Basic reading comprehension, you know.

41
posted on 04/09/2007 5:01:48 PM PDT
by Cymbaline
(I repeat myself when under stress I repeat myself when under stress I repeat myself when under stres)

It's not wise to quote Josephus in this regard. Almost all scholars consider the passage you quote to be a fraudulent insertion into the original text, (Google =Josephus jesus= and hunt around.) which could raise the question why someone thought fraud was nevessary.

The professor also doesn't understand that the soldiers who were guarding the tomb were themselves under a death sentence. If one would have been found asleep on guard duty, he would have been killed.

Also, putting guards in front of a tomb was highly unusual, as this was a highly unusual circumstance. The guards were guarding the tomb and the body with their very lives. If they were attacked, they would have been expected to fight to the death. Because if they didn't, if someone stole the body, or got into the tomb, the guards would have been killed anyway.

Next, the tomb was sealed. Meaning there was a seal of Caesar administered by Pilate put upon the stone. Anyone violating that seal would have been put to death. Its highly unlikely that the distraught Apostles would have dared to face that for something they believed in, was to them, over. The Apostles were not looking for Jesus after the crucifixion, until the women told them Jesus had risen, and then they thought the women were delusional.

Next, the stone itself was a massive boulder, rolled down an embankment, into position. The only way to roll the stone away was uphill. Imagine how much a boulder 4'-6' round must weigh. A couple thousand pounds?

For the professor to postulate that the resurrection is a metaphor, proves he has an ulterior motive, as he blatantly disregards facts from his theory.

Next, he disregards every piece of eye witness accounting reported from the time. How do you disregard hundreds of eyewitness accounting? Were there any official documentations to refute the eye witness accounts? And if so, what were they based upon.

Lastly the Apostles, almost all, were martyred for not just their beliefs, but what they were teaching. Peter himself did not feel worthy of dieing the same way as Christ. So they crucified him upside down. Pretty extreme death for a metaphor.

For what the Gospel teaches, for someone to call the resurrection a metaphor, is someone who doesn't have the chutzpah to come right out and say the Bible is an outright lie. Or else the person doesn't have the mental intellect to understand what they are actually saying.

Either the Bible is absolute truth, or it is a complete lie. There is no middle ground.

46
posted on 04/09/2007 6:12:59 PM PDT
by mountn man
(The pleasure you get from life, is equal to the attitude you put into it.)

Did Jesus Rise From the Dead? "The angel said to the women, "Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. He is not here; He has risen, just as He said." Matthew 28:5-6.

Spong is simply following modernist Bible scholarship, which has it that the Gospels are late compositions. The consensus among them is that except for Mark they were all composed after about 80 A.D. But that requires that we disregard all allusion to the destruction of the Temple as after the fact. I don’t see why we should.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.